However, as Dean, I have taken a very simple line & that is not to signanything which is "overtly political". I am well aware that the School doesmuch policy relevant work, so it is not an easy distinction to make, & thatI can be accussed of adopting too naive a line. I would be seen as signingon behalf of the School, and I think it important that the "School" is seento be politically neutral/objective. I'm well aware that every case isdifferent, & this is particularly outrageous, but at least if I adopt thesame simplistic blanket rule for eveything, I can justify it at least tomyself.

Trevor

At 23:07 24/04/02 +0100, Tim O'riordan wrote:>Dear Mike and Trevor,>>I sent you a draft letter for possinble signikng. Does all this add to you>interest in doing so? I attach a copy again.>>Cheers, Tim>>>Prof. T. O'Riordan>School of Environmental Sciences>University of East Anglia>Norwich>NR4 7TJ>>Tel : 01603 592840>Fax: 01603 250588>>----- Original Message ----->From: Guy Hughes <guyatXYZxyzpleandplanet.org>>To: tim O'riordan <t.oriordanatXYZxyz.ac.uk>>Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 9:13 AM>Subject: IPCC fallout>>>> Hi Tim,>>>> FYI here's a report from the Climate Action Network's observer at the>> IPCC reporting on the US/EXXON success at ousting Bob Watson.>>>> I was wondering how the letter was coming along - do your colleagues>> seem willing to sign it?>>>> Very best,>> Guy>>>>>> ------ Forwarded message follows ------->> To: can-talkatXYZxyz.topica.com>> From: "Bill Hare, CNE" <bhare@diala.gl3>>> Subject: [can-talk] IPCC Chairman: Pachauri in, Watson out>> Date sent: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 13:05:25 +0200>> Send reply to: bhare@diala.gl3>> Organization: Greenpeace>>>> [ Double-click this line for list subscription options ]>>>> Dear Can colleagues>>>> This note covers the outcome of the IPCC Plenary concluded on Saturday in>Geneva in relation to the Chairmanship position. Many other decisions were>taken and these will be covered in a subsequent note this afternoon or>tomorrow.>>>> As many of you would have seen from press reports over the weekend the>IPCC has voted Dr Pachauri of India into the position of Chairman of IPCC.>Dr Robert Watson was outvoted in a secret ballot on Friday afternoon ->Pachauri 76; Watson - 49; and Goldem>> berg - 7. As far as we can determine based>> on the expressed or inferred voting intentions, the vast majority of>African countries voted heavily for Pachauri as did all the OPECs, several>LatinAmerican countries (Venezuela, Peru and Chile), Japan and some other>Asian countries (India plus others).>> Voting for Watson were all of Europe>> except Russia, China, Canada, NZ and probably Australia plus a collection>of Asian countries and a few small island states present. For those>present it was certainly the ugliest and most vile IPCC meeting ever.>>>> Pachauri in the end refused any role for Watson, a gesture of indecency>not seen before in the IPCC and entirely against the spirit of the IPCC>since it began and all that it has stood for in all of the times past. The>fossil fuel industry was crawling>> all over the process it seems from>> beginning to end: and the beginning it seems was a long time before the>plenary itself and has involved a few senior UN officials acting in>extraordinary a partisan ways.>>>> Speaking personally, whatever view one takes of Pachauri the manner of his>victory and the forces so blatantly and we strongly suspect immorally,>behind the campaign to get him elected, are very likely to haunt his tenure>of the IPCC and probably the IP>> CC itself. In terms of body language at>> the meeting Pachauri spent an inordinate amount of time in consultation>with Don Pealrman and others associated with that camp and were overheard on>numerous occasions plotting and scheming on how to use rules of procedure to>bring on a vote and to keep>> Watson out should Pachauri win. He was too>> engaged with such discussions to talk with NGOs on Saturday.>>>> Objectively there were clear concerns from a group of developing>countries over Watson and his behaviour in the past as well as the concern>for this to be the turn of developing countries. The latter position of>course was spearheaded by the USA i>> n its pre Plenary diplomacy throughout>> Africa and Asia, it seems. In this context proposals for a Co-Chair>arrangement were dismissed as tantamount to suggesting that developing>country scientists were inferior to developed country scientists. In>addition to the election of Pachauri as C>> hair the Working Group co-chairs were>> apppointed and overall there is a very strong and credible line up. Drs>Solomon (USA) and Qin (China) were appointed to WGI on Science, Drs>Canziani (Argentina) and Parry (UK) to WGII on Impacts and Drs Davidson>and Metz (NL) for WGIII (as befor>> e).>>>> It is anticipated by most that Pachauri will not pay as much attention to>the details of the IPCC as Watson or Bolin before him and hence the>strength of the WG Chairs will be very important. In relation to Pachauri>himself it is apparent that many>> concerns were expressed as to an apparent>> conflict of interest between his position as IPCC Chair and position on>the board of the Indian government's oil company. I feel he will need to>resolve this soon.>>>> Some in industry are saying that Pachauri's election means that the IPCC>and governments are distancing themselves from the IPCC TAR and from Watson.>This is wrong but is obviously a pre-determined message and the possibility>of running such a message i>> s likely one of the reasons that many big>> US industries supported Pachauri and the reason why he got such high>profile support from the OPECs. Already one government has had to ask him>to come and address this issue soon because their business associations are>spinning the election this way>> . As to the NGO approach, we have to>> work to make sure that damage to the IPCC is limited as a consequence of>this affair whilst ensuring that its integrity is maintained over time.>My gut feeling is that industrial and political forces supporting>Pachauri and upon whom he so visibly>> relied (in addition to his own>> government) will not rest and nor will they be interested in free>lunches. We need to tell Pachauri that he should be at least as accessible>to NGOs as his predecessors were, and not just to big industries.>>>> I will limit my remarks here.>>>> Cheers>>>> Bill Hare>> Visiting Scientist>> Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)>> Telegrafenberg A31>> P.O. Box 60 12 03>> 14412 Potsdam>> GERMANY>> People & Planet (previously Third World First)>>>> Email : guyatXYZxyzpleandplanet.org>> On-line : www.peopleandplanet.org>> Address : 51 Union Street, Oxford OX4 1JP>> Telephone : UK 01865 245678>>>>Attachment Converted: "c:\eudora\attach\EM letter general1.doc">